Skip to main content
padlock icon - secure page this page is secure

Genoegen nemen met minder

Buy Article:

$15.00 + tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract

Settling for less: a deliberate political choice or a lack of information?

In a well-functioning democracy voters should elect parties and representatives with whom they agree on policy issues. The current paper investigates the extent to which Dutch voters in the 2017 parliamentary election had accurate information about parties’ policy positions. We elicit the extent to which voters think they vote for parties with whom they maximally agree (subjective congruence) and the extent to which this is actually true (objective congruence). Results show voters in our sample to have accurate information about approximately half of the policy positions of a random large party. Only 21.5 percent voted for a party with whom they were maximally objectively congruent. Objective congruence does not increase with information accuracy. Voters appear to consciously accept losses in terms of subjective congruence, as only 34.7 percent votes for a party with whom they think to be maximally congruent. These results are compatible with the interpretation of voters first choosing a party, and then (to some degree) adapting their personal policy positions to those of the chosen party.
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: congruence; information; policy preferences; representation; voting behavior

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: September 1, 2019

More about this publication?
  • Mens & Maatschappij, opgericht in 1925, stelt zich ten doel sociaalwetenschappelijke kennis te verspreiden die relevant is voor de Nederlandse samenleving. Hiertoe publiceert M&M oorspronkelijke, Nederlandstalige artikelen van auteurs uit alle sociale wetenschappen, ongeacht richting of stroming. M&M kenmerkt zich door: een breed palet aan thema's, representatief voor het hele onderzoeksgebied van de sociale wetenschappen; artikelen waarin de confrontatie wordt gezocht tussen sociaalwetenschappelijke theorie en empirisch onderzoek; een grondige en opbouwende reviewprocedure met oog voor wetenschappelijke kwaliteit en beleidsrelevantie. Behalve reguliere nummers publiceert M&M ieder jaar een themanummer waarin specialisten op uitnodiging van de redactie schrijven over een actueel thema.

    Mens & Maatschappij, founded in 1925, publishes the latest research in the social sciences relevant to Dutch society. To this end M&M publishes original articles in the Dutch language of authors from all social sciences, irrespective of approach. M&M can be characterized by: its broad range of topics, representative for the whole research domain of the social sciences; articles that confront theory with empirical research; a thorough and constructive review process with an eye for scholarly quality and relevance for policy. M&M publishes four issues a year, including a once-yearly special issue in which specialists write extensively about a topical theme, on the invitation of the editorial board.
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Subscribe to this Title
  • Back Issues, 1925-2000
  • Back Issues, 2001-2008
  • Peer Review, Ethics and Malpractice
  • Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more